Phaseo

Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs GLM 5.3

Pick a route and service tier under each model. Prices, the calculator and the verdicts follow your choice.

Try Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 in Chat
Ling 3.1 Flash 1019
GLM 5.3

At a glance

Generated from the rows below

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 for

  • The lowest cost per typical request ($0.0011)

Choose GLM 5.3 for

  • The longest output: 1,048,576 tokens
  • The most routes on Phaseo: 20

Overview

Lab
Inclusion AI
z.AI
Context window
1Mtokens
1Mtokens
Max output
262Ktokens
1.05Mtokens (best)from provider listings
Takes
Text
Text
Returns
Text
Text
Routes on Phaseo
1 provider
20 providers (best)
Released
29 Oct 2026
14 Aug 2026

Pricing

Prices on the route and tier chosen under each model

NovitaAI · StandardInference.net · Standard
Input
$0.30/ 1M tokens (best)
$0.90/ 1M tokens
Output
$0.90/ 1M tokens (best)
$3.00/ 1M tokens
Cache read
$0.06/ 1M tokens (best)
$0.15/ 1M tokens
Typical request2K tokens in, 500 out
$0.0011 (best)
$0.0033

What will it cost?

Estimate a month of requests on the route and tier chosen for each model

ModelPer requestPer month
Ling 3.1 Flash 1019NovitaAI · Standard$0.0011$31.50
GLM 5.3Inference.net · Standard$0.0033$99.00

Uses the route and tier chosen under each model, over 30 days. Cached input is billed at the cache-read rate.

Performance

Live gateway traffic

Latency p50
No traffic yet
No traffic yet
Throughput p50
No traffic yet
No traffic yet
Requests, last 24 hours
No traffic yet
No traffic yet

Activity

Tokens sent through Phaseo each day over the last 30 days

None of these models has had traffic through Phaseo in the last 30 days.

Features

Features from the parameters Phaseo routes support

Tool calling
Yes
Yes
Structured outputs
Not listed
Yes
Reasoning effort
Yes
Yes
Web search
Not listed
Yes
Prompt cachingon the chosen route
Yes
Yes
Quantisationon the chosen route
Not stated
Not stated

Benchmarks

Only results that two or more of the selected models report get a row

Compare at effort

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index Independent

Higher is better · at Max effort · 1 of 2 models tested

Ling 3.1 Flash 101929.5
GLM 5.331.7

Where they rank

The five leaders on each capability index, then the compared models. Each model at its best-scoring setting.

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index42 models ranked

  1. #1Claude Opus 5.558.4
  2. #2GPT-6 Astra56.9
  3. #3GPT-6.1 Sol54.5
  4. #4Claude Sonnet 5.554.2
  5. #5GPT-6.1 Terra51.0
  6. #16GLM 5.331.7
  7. #19Ling 3.1 Flash 101929.5

Artificial Analysis Coding Index171 models ranked

  1. #1Claude Fable 5.181.6
  2. #2GPT 5.6 Sol78.3
  3. #3Claude Opus 578.0
  4. #4GPT-6 Astra77.1
  5. #5Grok 4.676.8
  6. #14GLM 5.374.8

Artificial Analysis Agentic Index112 models ranked

  1. #1Claude Fable 5.157.9
  2. #2Claude Opus 556.5
  3. #3Qwen 3.8 Max 090256.0
  4. #4Muse Spark 1.355.5
  5. #5Qwen 3.8 Flash Next53.6
  6. #6GLM 5.353.1

Epoch Capabilities Index164 models ranked

  1. #1GPT-6 Astra169.1
  2. #2Claude Opus 5.5168.4
  3. #3GPT-6.1 Terra168.1
  4. #4GPT-6.1 Sol167.8
  5. #5Claude Sonnet 5.5166.7
  6. #32GLM 5.3156.2
Cost
Artificial Analysis Evaluation Cost (USD)matched by effort level · lower is better
$2,009 (best)
$3,496
General
Artificial Analysis Progress Index v1matched by effort level
321.6
322.7 (best)

Lab-reported results come from each lab’s own launch materials and may use different settings. Independent results come from third-party evaluators.

Providers

Routes Phaseo serves today, standard-tier prices per 1M tokens

  • NovitaAI
    NovitaAI
    Input
    $0.30
    Output
    $0.90
    Context window
    1,000,000

    Standard

Standard-tier prices. The first row is the cheapest route; pick another under the model’s name at the top.

Details

Knowledge cutoff
Not published
Not published
Status
Available
Available
Licence
MIT
MIT
Subscription plans
None mapped
7 plansGLM Coding Plan Lite, GLM Coding Plan Max, GLM Coding Plan Pro…
API docs
Not published
Not published

Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs GLM 5.3: side-by-side summary

Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 and GLM 5.3 are both available through the Phaseo API, so switching between them is a change of model id rather than a new integration.

Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 is from Inclusion AI. It has a 1,000,000-token context window. On its cheapest route it costs $0.30 per 1M input tokens and $0.90 per 1M output tokens.

GLM 5.3 is from z.AI. It has a 1,000,000-token context window. On its cheapest route it costs $0.90 per 1M input tokens and $3.00 per 1M output tokens.

Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 model details, providers and pricingGLM 5.3 model details, providers and pricing

Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs GLM 5.3 at a glance

Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 and GLM 5.3 compared on price, context window and benchmark score
AttributeLing 3.1 Flash 1019GLM 5.3
LabInclusion AIz.AI
Input price per 1M tokens$0.30$0.90
Output price per 1M tokens$0.90$3.00
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Max output262,144 tokens1,048,576 tokens
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index29.5 (#19)31.7 (#16)

Prices are each model's cheapest standard route on Phaseo. Benchmark ranks use each model's best-scoring evaluated setting.

Frequently asked questions

Which is cheaper, Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 or GLM 5.3?

Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 is cheaper for both input and output tokens. Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 costs $0.30 per 1M input tokens and $0.90 per 1M output tokens; GLM 5.3 costs $0.90 and $3.00, each on its cheapest standard route on Phaseo.

Which has the longer context window, Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 or GLM 5.3?

Both have a 1,000,000-token context window.

Which scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 or GLM 5.3?

GLM 5.3 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index. GLM 5.3 scores 31.7, ranked #16 of 42. Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 scores 29.5, ranked #19 of 42.

Can I use Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 and GLM 5.3 through one API?

Yes. Both are served through the Phaseo API, so you can switch between them by changing the model id.

Help keep public data accurate

See something missing, incorrect, or out of date? Tell us about this page.